Judge: don’t bring me any more anonymous file-sharing lawsuits

An Illinois federal judge has had it with mass, anonymous file-sharing …

For a lawyer, it's bad enough when a federal judge wants to talk about your “ill-considered lawsuit” that has “abused the litigation system in more than one way.” It's worse when that judge tells you that facts in your case “were not as asserted" and that case filings “did not really comply with the subjective and objective good faith requirement." And when the judge says that your complaints about the fraudulent behavior of others are "ironic," you know this is not a judge you want to see again.

But former divorce-lawyer-turned-copyright-hound John Steele isn't deterred by mere judicial rulings about the defects of his peer-to-peer file-sharing cases. Steele is responsible for most of the mass file-sharing litigation currently conducted in Illinois federal courts, and after receiving the above dismissal from Judge Milton Shadur, he continued to file cases.

On May 4, he filed a case on behalf of New York company Boy Racer, which is "considered a premier name within the alt-porn niche," over the alleged file-sharing of its film L.A. Pink. Federal complaints are randomly assigned to a judge at the district court in which they are filed, and on May 5, the Boy Racer case ended up on the docket of Judge Shadur.

On May 6, Steele dismissed the case he had brought only two days earlier. But Shadur wasn't going to let Steele just slink away. Though federal courts can indeed be slow, it took Shadur only three days from the case assignment to issue a memorandum order that opened with these words:

It seems that attorney John Steele (“Steele”) might be well advised to stay away from Las Vegas or other casinos, because his current filing on behalf of plaintiff Boy Racer, Inc. has—despite odds in the range of 25 to 1—been assigned at random to the calendar of this District Court, which had previously been the recipient of another random assignment of a Steele-filed action (that one being CP Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-300, No. 10 C 6255). This Court had ended up dismissing the CP Productions action for the reasons stated in its February 7, 2011 memorandum order and its February 24, 2011 memorandum opinion and order, which (among other reasons) rejected attorney Steele’s effort to shoot first and identify his targets later.

Shadur went on to say that he doesn't want to see any more of these "John Doe" cases that bring a huge list of IP addresses against people who may or may not even live in Illinois. "It would seem feasible for Steele and his client to pursue the normal path of suing an identifiable (and identified) defendant or defendants rather than a passel of 'Does,'" wrote Shadur. "Moreover, that practice would also facilitate the determination as to which defendant or defendants is or are amenable to suit here in Illinois."

The case was dismissed, and Shadur noted that "Boy Racer is free to advance its copyright infringement claims against one or more identified defendants on an individual basis or, if appropriate, a plausible conspiracy theory." But it's quite clear that at least one federal judge simply will not entertain these cases in their current form.

Still, that's not stopping Steele. He has continued to file new cases in May and to pursue old ones—so long as they don't end up before Judge Shadur. And, at odds of 25:1, he should be able to avoid too many more run-ins with a judge who quite clearly would prefer never to see him again.

Is there some kind of Federal Judge association where the judges can be kept up on trends in the legal system? Some kind of conference they can (must) attend anually to help keep them on the same page? something that might get federal laws being interpreted close to the same way across the nation? Some kind of accountability for these lifetime appointees?

Something like that would make big strides in combating the ability of people like Steele to game the system, rolling the dice over when they don't like the result they got the first time. It might also help deal with areas like the crap in Texas. If 200 judges are pointing out how wrong interpretations are of 15 other ones, maybe those 15 would change their ways?

Is there some kind of Federal Judge association where the judges can be kept up on trends in the legal system? Some kind of conference they can (must) attend anually to help keep them on the same page? something that might get federal laws being interpreted close to the same way across the nation? Some kind of accountability for these lifetime appointees?

Something like that would make big strides in combating the ability of people like Steele to game the system, rolling the dice over when they don't like the result they got the first time. It might also help deal with areas like the crap in Texas. If 200 judges are pointing out how wrong interpretations are of 15 other ones, maybe those 15 would change their ways?

If you follow this reasoning to its end, that would make for a very scary country. I understand the usefulness of having one way of doing things, but you would give up freedoms in the process.

Is there some kind of Federal Judge association where the judges can be kept up on trends in the legal system? Some kind of conference they can (must) attend anually to help keep them on the same page? something that might get federal laws being interpreted close to the same way across the nation? Some kind of accountability for these lifetime appointees?

Something like that would make big strides in combating the ability of people like Steele to game the system, rolling the dice over when they don't like the result they got the first time. It might also help deal with areas like the crap in Texas. If 200 judges are pointing out how wrong interpretations are of 15 other ones, maybe those 15 would change their ways?

Our justice system does indeed include a concept of legal precedent, something that we can hope is being set in these cases. But the whole point of individual judges is so that they can bring their own impartial view into a case; if they all simply agreed that something was to be decided a given way, they'd be a legislature, and we have another branch of the government for that. It may not work very well right now, but the best way to get something to be consistently decided a given way is to have a law passed about it.

I'm sure Mr. Steele will be here shortly to tell us that most judges are allowing his discovery process to proceed, and laugh in our faces about how adeptly he's gaming the system to make lots of money on settlements from people who don't deserve that kind of treatment. But what he forgets is that, while the judges who agree with him may be more numerous, Justice Shadur is the one getting the press.

Steele has balls, but he also has a limited timeframe to get things done. The longer he pursues his cases the more the district judges will see him for what he is. Wouldn't surprise me if more than one of the judges in that district start banging Steele over the head.

I love reading these stories. however Is it legal to drop a case and refile in hopes of getting a judge who might be nice to you?

That's called forum-shopping, and my understanding is that engaging in it will piss off judges way faster than filing mass John Doe lawsuits would, if the judges catch on to what you're trying to pull.

Still, that's not stopping Steele. He has continued to file new cases in May and to pursue old ones—so long as they don't end up before Judge Shadur. And, at odds of 25:1, he should be able to avoid too many more run-ins with a judge who quite clearly would prefer never to see him again.

Which of course presumes the Clerks office at the courthouse handles these cases in a non discriminory way.

I'm sure judges talk; you annoy one this much, you surely annoy them all.

Is there some kind of Federal Judge association where the judges can be kept up on trends in the legal system? Some kind of conference they can (must) attend anually to help keep them on the same page? something that might get federal laws being interpreted close to the same way across the nation? Some kind of accountability for these lifetime appointees?

Something like that would make big strides in combating the ability of people like Steele to game the system, rolling the dice over when they don't like the result they got the first time. It might also help deal with areas like the crap in Texas. If 200 judges are pointing out how wrong interpretations are of 15 other ones, maybe those 15 would change their ways?

Your questions hit a lot of aspects of our judicial system in the US. There's no conference to keep everyone on the same page per say, but there is the principal of stare decisis(judicial precedent). This means that ruling tend to agree with previous rulings unless the variables or logic used in the case is sufficiently different. Different interpretations of the law can also effect a judge's decision, and happen most often with older laws.

The lawyer in question isn't gaming the system, he's just gotten unlucky a few times. :D

Robot Dinosaur wrote:

Z1ggy wrote:

I love reading these stories. however Is it legal to drop a case and refile in hopes of getting a judge who might be nice to you?

That's called forum-shopping, and my understanding is that engaging in it will piss off judges way faster than filing mass John Doe lawsuits would, if the judges catch on to what you're trying to pull.

As a 4th year Political Science student I can say that Robot Dinosaur hit the nail on the head here.

One of the jobs of the defendants lawyers is to find these type of cases that have been brought before by the plaintiff and point out to the current judge how the previous judges have handled the cases. Lawyers who practice this type of law are well aware of previous cases, a lawyer who is not active in the area may have to spend some time researching previous cases. This is the big advantage of having representation that operates in a given specialty.

Steele has balls, but he also has a limited timeframe to get things done. The longer he pursues his cases the more the district judges will see him for what he is. Wouldn't surprise me if more than one of the judges in that district start banging Steele over the head.

I think this latest round from Shadur just gives more evidence that all Steele cares about is settlement money. If he has any intelligence then he knows that in court these mass filings aren't holding up. It appears to me that he is putting in the minimum legal work required to cover him from extortion charges, collects settlements when he can, and when he finally pushes too far and his system crumbles, he cuts and runs with his earnings. Steele has shown he never intends to actually fight these through court.

Too bad California judges don't have this attitude :( Last week I received a ransom letter... (fightcopyrighttrolls.wordpress.com)

But did you do it?

Did what? Downloaded gay pornography? No. Never.

I don't know what the ransom letter accused you of.

(Though to be truthful, I was thinkinf of Chicago the musical when I wrote that). "uh-uh...Not quilty"

Ransom letter accused me of downloading gay pornography and demands about 2000. If I don't pay today, they double the ransom amount. Threat? To be named on the case, thus to be publicly associated with gay pornography. Unpleasant to say the least? Huh?

"No never" was not just my unsubstantiated statement. I do have a bullet-proof defense, but I don't want to reveal it now: scumbag lawyers are known for twisting prematurely reveled defense ideas so these ideas can be used against a victim in unpredictable, perverted ways.

One of the jobs of the defendants lawyers is to find these type of cases that have been brought before by the plaintiff and point out to the current judge how the previous judges have handled the cases. Lawyers who practice this type of law are well aware of previous cases, a lawyer who is not active in the area may have to spend some time researching previous cases. This is the big advantage of having representation that operates in a given specialty.

Yes, but as the whole point of these cases is to force a settlement that's cheaper than the cost of a trial, there really aren't any defense lawyers. Plus the "anonymous defendant" thing, which also tends to make there be no lawyers.

One of the jobs of the defendants lawyers is to find these type of cases that have been brought before by the plaintiff and point out to the current judge how the previous judges have handled the cases. Lawyers who practice this type of law are well aware of previous cases, a lawyer who is not active in the area may have to spend some time researching previous cases. This is the big advantage of having representation that operates in a given specialty.

Yes, but as the whole point of these cases is to force a settlement that's cheaper than the cost of a trial, there really aren't any defense lawyers. Plus the "anonymous defendant" thing, which also tends to make there be no lawyers.

True. I am one of those “anonymous defenders”. Not surprisingly, judge threw away my motions because they violated court rules (no anonymous parties are allowed). So how would I fight against revealing of my identity in a different way? By revealing my identity? Catch 22. This docket outlines my arguments: http://www.scribd.com/doc/55048420/310- ... to-Dismiss.

Ransom letter accused me of downloading gay pornography and demands about 2000. If I don't pay today, they double the ransom amount. Threat? To be named on the case, thus to be publicly associated with gay pornography. Unpleasant to say the least? Huh?

"No never" was not just my unsubstantiated statement. I do have a bullet-proof defense, but I don't want to reveal it now: scumbag lawyers are known for twisting prematurely reveled defense ideas so these ideas can be used against a victim in unpredictable, perverted ways.

When this nightmare is over, I'll reveal much more information.

Assuming it gets that far. If you don't make yourself a target, nothing may happen before his business scheme falls apart and he cuts his losses and runs off with the money. As it is, all of his cases total to more than the population of most midwestern towns, and it simply would not be feasible for him to start chasing hundreds or thousands of individual defendants, especially when he keeps piling on the lawsuits as he is now.

As it is right now, you're another face in the crowd, an unremarkable thief/pirate/ruffian/highwayman/vagabond to be roughed up for some easy cash. It's incredibly unlikely that he'll hire a local counsel to chase everyone to their jurisdictions given the amount of people he's suing(he's not in it to fight a decade long legal battle, he's in it to get a quick payoff like any other Chicago mobster), but he may need a couple of dog and pony show cases to scare other people with the "See? See? We did it to him so we can do it to you!" cases. Don't give in, but also don't make yourself a target needlessly, and it won't have to be you. You'll be subject to a lot of harassing phone calls, but the best thing you can do is not "give him a reason", so to speak.

Too bad California judges don't have this attitude Last week I received a ransom letter... (fightcopyrighttrolls.wordpress.com)

But did you do it?

Did what? Downloaded gay pornography? No. Never.

I don't know what the ransom letter accused you of.

(Though to be truthful, I was thinkinf of Chicago the musical when I wrote that). "uh-uh...Not quilty"

Ransom letter accused me of downloading gay pornography and demands about 2000. If I don't pay today, they double the ransom amount. Threat? To be named on the case, thus to be publicly associated with gay pornography. Unpleasant to say the least? Huh?

"No never" was not just my unsubstantiated statement. I do have a bullet-proof defense, but I don't want to reveal it now: scumbag lawyers are known for twisting prematurely reveled defense ideas so these ideas can be used against a victim in unpredictable, perverted ways.

When this nightmare is over, I'll reveal much more information.

Sucks. I always wanted to be hit with the RIAA ones. I would have countersued.

One of the jobs of the defendants lawyers is to find these type of cases that have been brought before by the plaintiff and point out to the current judge how the previous judges have handled the cases. Lawyers who practice this type of law are well aware of previous cases, a lawyer who is not active in the area may have to spend some time researching previous cases. This is the big advantage of having representation that operates in a given specialty.

That's, IF one can afford representation. For far too many people living paycheck to paycheck, due to no fault of their own mind you (rather to a still floundering economy and job market), even $2,000 paid over time can mean the difference between homelessness and just scraping by.

I clearly understand what you are talking about. So far I was very careful not to leave any links to my real identity (even now I'm posting through TOR). Looking back, I sometimes regret the dangerous game I started three months ago, but on the other hand I'm glad I was disruptive to troll's business model, and risking to be pathetic, I tend to think that I contributed to demise of the copyright trolling phenomena. I made myself visible (searchable to be precise), and therefore was able to help many victims to understand what is going on and hence make educated decisions.

Talking about jurisdiction, Sperlein currently presses hard on conspiracy in order to be able to sue entire crowd in his home state: http://www.scribd.com/doc/55977911/10-C ... nt-50-Does. Though his arguments look insane, it will take time and effort to debunk them in judges' eyes. Hopefully either EFF steps in (which is unlikely - they are overwhelmed) or these guys and girls find a guru lawyer - legal expenses divided by 50 don't look scary.

Your right, Every 20-30 cases, when we get Shadur for one, it makes me so sad. I guess I'll just have to settle for the other 95% of the cases in which the judges give us the green light (including Shadur's own boss BTW).

If 1 out of 10 judges agrees with your legal position, you probably shouldn't brag about it.

I think pirates should put their money where their mouth is. Steal as much porn as you can, and see if anything happens. :)

I clearly understand what you are talking about. So far I was very careful not to leave any links to my real identity (even now I'm posting through TOR). Looking back, I sometimes regret the dangerous game I started three months ago, but on the other hand I'm glad I was disruptive to troll's business model, and risking to be pathetic, I tend to think that I contributed to demise of the copyright trolling phenomena. I made myself visible (searchable to be precise), and therefore was able to help many victims to understand what is going on and hence make educated decisions.

Talking about jurisdiction, Sperlein currently presses hard on conspiracy in order to be able to sue entire crowd in his home state: http://www.scribd.com/doc/55977911/10-C ... nt-50-Does. Though his arguments look insane, it will take time and effort to debunk them in judges' eyes. Hopefully either EFF steps in (which is unlikely - they are overwhelmed) or these guys and girls find a guru lawyer - legal expenses divided by 50 don't look scary.

Well I wish you all the luck and will be rooting for you. Let's just hope this doesn't turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory for you.

Your right, Every 20-30 cases, when we get Shadur for one, it makes me so sad. I guess I'll just have to settle for the other 95% of the cases in which the judges give us the green light (including Shadur's own boss BTW).

If 1 out of 10 judges agrees with your legal position, you probably shouldn't brag about it.

I think pirates should put their money where their mouth is. Steal as much porn as you can, and see if anything happens.

If you're the real JS then you really need to go fuck yourself. Let's see you put your money where your mouth is and do a little leg work and put actual names to IP addresses instead of just using blanket extortion practices to get paid. But then It's all about the money with you types, ain't it?

Your right, Every 20-30 cases, when we get Shadur for one, it makes me so sad. I guess I'll just have to settle for the other 95% of the cases in which the judges give us the green light (including Shadur's own boss BTW).

If 1 out of 10 judges agrees with your legal position, you probably shouldn't brag about it.

I think pirates should put their money where their mouth is. Steal as much porn as you can, and see if anything happens.

There he is, less than three hours later. Lets see what I'd predicted:

MJ the Prophet wrote:

I'm sure Mr. Steele will be here shortly to tell us that most judges are allowing his discovery process to proceed, and laugh in our faces about how adeptly he's gaming the system to make lots of money on settlements from people who don't deserve that kind of treatment. But what he forgets is that, while the judges who agree with him may be more numerous, Justice Shadur is the one getting the press.

Yep, his post sounds like he's smirking and bragging about the vast amounts of money he's going to take from people, though not in so many words.

John, have you successfully sued anyone for copyright infringement? Because if so, we haven't heard of it. Are you worried that its the opinions by Justice Shadur which are getting press, rather than your "victories"? Because one would think that legal precedent gets set by the cases one actually hears about. And doesn't it reflect poorly on you to voluntarily drop a case just because you know a particular judge is going to require you to have actual proof before allowing you to send settlement letters to people who may have done nothing wrong? Because thus far, if I'm correct, you've actually not shown that a single one of the anonymous defendants is actually committing copyright infringement.

Despite calling people thieves and pirates, you've never proven with any certainty at all that those statements are true of even a single person. You probably don't want to have to try, as your "business model" appears to be based around settlement letters rather than actually suing people. What happens if more judges start disallowing your discovery process? What happens if everyone just starts ignoring your settlement letters?

If you're the real JS then you really need to go fuck yourself. Let's see you put your money where your mouth is and do a little leg work and put actual names to IP addresses instead of just using blanket extortion practices to get paid. But then It's all about the money with you types, ain't it?

Well, of course it's about money, how else would you be a proper Chicago mobster? I mean, he's probably rolling in the ill-gotten gains now, but back when he first started, he couldn't even afford to write up his own legal documents. Rags to riches, that's how you do the American dream, amirite?

Is there some kind of Federal Judge association where the judges can be kept up on trends in the legal system? Some kind of conference they can (must) attend anually to help keep them on the same page? something that might get federal laws being interpreted close to the same way across the nation? Some kind of accountability for these lifetime appointees?

Something like that would make big strides in combating the ability of people like Steele to game the system, rolling the dice over when they don't like the result they got the first time. It might also help deal with areas like the crap in Texas. If 200 judges are pointing out how wrong interpretations are of 15 other ones, maybe those 15 would change their ways?

ANAL but my understanding was that this is where the higher courts and eventually the supreme court comes into play. The problem with that in this situation is that it requires the case actually proceed forward and that both parties are willing and able to fight it all the way up to that level which then results in a ruling that becomes legal precedent for all the lower courts. I don't see one of these cases ever going that far as Steele and his ilk have no interest in fighting, even a winning, legal battle as it just ends up costing them money. They are just looking for quick settlements, as clearly demonstrated by their actions. The RIAA on the other hand was looking to make a point and clearly lost money on their cases, especially those that went up to the higher courts, but they were okay with that because it just meant more coverage and it was more effective at making the point.

Right now, it would seem that the best thing you can do if you are faced with one of these lawsuits is to just ignore it as much as possible. None have the lawyers involved have shown any interest in actually taking one of these cases to an actual ruling. Just make sure that you don't end up giving them a default ruling due to missing something required.

Steele has balls, but he also has a limited timeframe to get things done. The longer he pursues his cases the more the district judges will see him for what he is. Wouldn't surprise me if more than one of the judges in that district start banging Steele over the head.

I don't see one of these cases ever going that far as Steele and his ilk have no interest in fighting, even a winning, legal battle as it just ends up costing them money.

Especially when, as by the time the years have rolled on and a final, final, final, final, final judgment comes down, even if he wins, the defendant will be pushed into bankruptcy by the undoubtedly absurdly ridiculous number that the defendant is judged with and Steele won't end up seeing a penny.

The Jammie Thomas case for example. It's all well and good for the RIAA that they "won", but it was such a pyrrhic victory for them that they're not doing it again, it hasn't stopped piracy, it hasn't gotten them good press, and they'll never see a penny from all of those years of legal battles, because she was judged so far into bankruptcy that she very likely would have otherwise had to work a hundred of her lifetimes and stil not come close to paying it off. The only thing that kept the RIAA in that battle is their massive egos.

Steele can't afford to have that kind of press. Officially right now, he's still under-the-radar. Nobody covers him outside of niche institutions(no offense, Ars), and he knows it's in his best interests to keep it that way.

Your right, Every 20-30 cases, when we get Shadur for one, it makes me so sad. I guess I'll just have to settle for the other 95% of the cases in which the judges give us the green light (including Shadur's own boss BTW).

Once case?

Nate's article and the one Shadur wrote the opinion for is:1:11-cv-02984 Boy Racer, inc. v. Does 1-22

You filed this one the following week, assigned to Shadur and you dismissed it.1:11-cv-03097 Boy Racer, Inc. v. Does 1-17

Chief Judge Holderman may have green lighted one of your cases. So what?